Qantas has announced it will delay the delivery of two of its Airbus A380 aircraft on order by at least four years and indicated that more delays or cancellations could happen. It announcing the decision,... (www.thefloridanewsjournal.com) More...

Looks like the original debate on capacity, what 15-20 years back, is finally working out. The A380 is too big for most markets. When all the chips fall, those who have chosen wisely, will survive. I suppose the next question might be is the 747-8I too big as well. Maybe the 787 & A350 is the right size for the emerging markets. The debates continue.

The other squawk has the better story. No to slight the OP, but the Age has better insight into it than a newspaper on the other side of the planet. Plus it's caused a lot of conclusions to be jumped to here. Case in point: how everyone went straight to the aircraft being the problem and taking us to another Airbus v. Boeing war.

Clearly the problem here is cost, plus another carrier (VOZ) encroaching on their turf especially with business passengers. Qantas wants to refocus on that portion of their product, and how it relates to their domestic service, and that is why they are delaying taking in the A380.

It is certainly about cost. It has nothing to do with it being Airbus, since Qantas has a huge order for 320 NEOs. Though, perhaps Qantas fears it may not be able to fill the seats of more A380s?? What do you think?

The A380 is quickly proving to be inefficient. In a market where the number of passengers is continuing to decrease, aircraft like the A340, A350, 777, and 787 are what's going to cut it. Airbus was being foolish when they designed the A380.

From my point of view, it seems to me that Airbus products are always copies of Boeing's. Boeing is the trailblazer in this industry compared to Airbus. Boeing seems to me like the confident senior clansman and Airbus the junior trying to be like the big kids. Of course we can't quantify my opinion but this is my perception of the matter.

There is one area where Airbus broke new ground and "bested" Boeing and this is in the Super Jumbo arena. Airbus decided to make something bigger and better than the 747 which was in a class all by itself. Unfortunately, the A380 will go down as one of the biggest flops in modern business history. Am I speaking to soon? Where is my proof? Just wait and see. It doesn't matter what anyone's counter-argument will be. The A380 is too big, too problematic, and too ugly to be a success. The wing-cracks issue will be the final nail. The solution for Airbus? PULL THE PLUG. Cut your losses, cancel all remaining orders, refund the deposits. Divert your resources to other more promising avenues such as the A350 program. (Which of course is Airbus's response to the 787 Dreamliner. Remember what I said? Boeing leads, Airbus follows.) Who cares about losing face at this point? Get out and refocus.Of course Boeing makes errors. Of course they aren't perfect, but my impression is that Boeing is a company made up of people who love aviation and building fine airplanes and Airbus is just a business looking to make money selling airplanes. Again, this is my perception and arguments aren't going to change that.My advice to Germany? Get out. Build your own airplanes if you want to be successful. German engineering is spot on while the French are just plain quirky. Their styles don't match.

From my point of view, it seems to me that Airbus products are always copies of Boeing's. Boeing is the trailblazer in this industry compared to Airbus. Boeing seems to me like the confident senior classman and Airbus the junior trying to be like the big kids. Of course we can't quantify my opinion but this is my perception of the matter.

There is one area where Airbus broke new ground and "bested" Boeing and this is in the Super Jumbo arena. Airbus decided to make something bigger and better than the 747 which was in a class all by itself. Unfortunately, the A380 will go down as one of the biggest flops in modern business history. Am I speaking to soon? Where is my proof? Just wait and see. It doesn't matter what anyone's counter-argument will be. The A380 is too big, too problematic, and too ugly to be a success. The wing-cracks issue will be the final nail. The solution for Airbus? PULL THE PLUG. Cut your losses, cancel all remaining orders, refund the deposits. Divert your resources to other more promising avenues such as the A350 program. (Which of course is Airbus's response to the 787 Dreamliner. Remember what I said? Boeing leads, Airbus follows.) Who cares about losing face at this point? Get out and refocus.Of course Boeing makes errors. Of course they aren't perfect, but my impression is that Boeing is a company made up of people who love aviation and building fine airplanes and Airbus is just a business looking to make money selling airplanes. Again, this is my perception and arguments aren't going to change that.My advice to Germany? Get out. Build your own airplanes if you want to be successful. German engineering is spot on while the French are just plain quirky. Their styles don't match.

I am not anti Airbus but I think the chickens are coming home to roost with this huge plane that was probably built more for national prestige than for performance and profitability. I think we will see more of this especially if they are having trouble filing the seats. Wing cracks and failed engines haven't helped either.

The company is reacting to financial pressures caused by more seats than necessary on A380 routes. I am saying maintenence issues are not the only problem with the A380 down under. Allowing computers to 'assemble' aircraft has proved sucessful as shown by the 777 program. Allowing FRENCH computers to assemble aircraft has resulted in the A380. Boeing recently took some uneconomical (too much fuel and maintenence) A340's off the hands of China Eastern to secure an order for 20 777's. Your Honor, I rest my case.

They don't use "FRENCH" computers, as you ignorantly put it. Airbus is a long standing HP customer. What the heck is a French or American computer anyhow?? All the components (commodities) are made in Asia anyhow. Though, if you really want to label them, Airbus uses AMERICAN computers.

For some reason I think he is talking about the software.... But that really doesn't make a difference.... They still aren't happy with the plane especially with the engine incident and the ever-unfolding wing cracks that appear...

Airbus uses CATIA, a software developed by Dassault Systems and yes, it's French. Airbus had issues with some plants using V4 and some using V5. However, Dassault said that it has many customers working on large projects using both version and no one was having issues, except for Airbus. Therefore, i highly doubt it was the software. THe problem was most likely with the person sitting in front of the keyboard or just the management in general.

My post is not ignorant at all, rather insightful really. Computers are computers. Most are conceived in California and executed in Asia. It is the location of the computer that is the important difference here. Yes the DS software had bugs, every large system does, but the reaction of the users to those problems is what makes one computer work like a dream. (pun intended) French computers are used by folks with a national and corporate culture that creates designs and manufactured product that lack the appeal to passengers that aircraft made elsewhere enjoys. It extends to acceptance contrasted against resignation by pilots and cabin crew. This is of course subjective and can be argued by persons with clear minds, but the objective problems with the A380 are clear, concise, and have been accepted by Airbus.

I did mention in my first sentence that the reason for delay is one of sales and over capacity for the Aussies, the problems of air worthiness weigh on all the operators.

Airbus sells a lot of planes. On a level playing field many would never fly. The European governments involvement sets up road blocks such that some carriers are compelled to purchase for political and tax reasons. To get other airlines to buy, they sell planes and allow years of operation before payment is due. Hard working Europeans are footing the interest on those schemes. (I am trying to get that deal for my next Mercedes, but no traction so far, they pointed out they are not connected to Airbus as before.)

Boeing knows how to build airplanes. Airbus is still trying to figure it out. Look at the orders for the A380. A giant boondoggle that will result in huge losses. Airbus will NEVER be the company Boeing is. Go America. Europe you are a distant second when it comes to making airplanes. The A380 proves it.

The engine that blew up was not manufactured by Airbus, so i don't see how you can hold that against them. The "wings" never cracked. What cracked were rib feet/brackets. IN regards to delays, just look at the 787. 787 delamination problems? I really don't need to get into all the other issues that Boeing has gone through, since it has all been said on here already. Airbus knows how to build aircraft just as well as Boeing does. Airbus was not born out of nothing. It came together from various aircraft manufacturers who had been in business well before they formed Airbus. As for being distant second, up until last year and going into this year, boeing and Airbus were more or less 50/50 in regards to market share. I suggest you try again to lay down some proof that Boeing is far superior. You can't because there is not one shred of evidence that would prove that fact.

Oh sorry I forgot poor order numbers and delayed orders. I want to clarify I wish Airbus success but so far the A380 is not doing well. Nothing against Europe they kick ass with their space program and high speed trains but aircraft manufacturing needs a little work.

JJ, the 787 had plenty of delays as well. Let's not forget that Boeing has had it's issues with manufacturing as well: 737NG bear straps and chords, jsut to name one. Look, neither one is perfect, there is no such thing. Further, we can argue about this until we are both blue in the face. Though, it will not solve anything. The Boeing 777 is my fav aircraft - flight deck is my profile pic. Also, keep in mind that Qantas has a huge order for 320 NEOs, so it is not as if they dislike Airbus all of sudden because they are delaying the A380 orders.

Regarding the A380, The problem with this airplane is not about their engines, wings, performance, ... . The problem is that there is low demand for ultra huge aircrafts. Just take a look on B747-8i orders.

As far as Boing or Airbus being safer. Boeing has proven that their aircraft can withstand far greater G forces than any Airbus has. Look at the China Airlines flight in he 90s that was basically upside down for a short period of time but recovered and landed in Los Angeles with only a piece of the horizontal stab broken. Meanwhile Air France 447 flies through a thunderstorm and breaks up. Plastic and glue cannot hold a plane together, as Airbus has shown.

According to the preliminary reports, Air France 447 crashed due to an aerodynamic stall. That airplane only broke up when it smashed the water. Can a Boeing aircraft whithstand the G forces of a crash????

No that's true it cannot, however at the time there was an AD for the pitot tubes on the A330 which Air France had not done on that plane. As a result the pitot tubes iced up and caused incorrect airspeed readings and the pilots essentially oversped the aircraft and also seemingly made no attempt to avoid the thunderstorm straight ahead of them.